DC rushes to prevent horde of law-abiding citizens from entering city

posted at 12:01 pm on July 28, 2014 by Matt Vespa

Over the weekend, a rather important decision regarding gun rights was handed down in the Palmer v. DC case: the District of Columbia’s ordinance that prevents law-abiding citizens from carrying their firearms outside of their homes is unconstitutional. It’s a decision that’s been pending for five years – and it applies to both open and concealed carry.

In the decision written by Judge Frederick Scullin of the New York District Court for the Northern District of New York, he said:

In light of Heller, McDonald, and their progeny, there is no longer any basis on which this Court can conclude that the District of Columbia’s total ban on the public carrying of ready- to-use handguns outside the home is constitutional under any level of scrutiny. Therefore, the Court finds that the District of Columbia’s complete ban on the carrying of handguns in public is unconstitutional.

Accordingly, the Court grants Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment and enjoins Defendants from enforcing the home limitations of D.C. Code § 7-2502.02(a)(4) and enforcing D.C. Code § 22-4504(a) unless and until such time as the District of Columbia adopts a licensing mechanism consistent with constitutional standards enabling people to exercise their Second Amendment right to bear arms.4 Furthermore, this injunction prohibits the District from completely banning the carrying of handguns in public for self-defense by otherwise qualified non-residents based solely on the fact that they are not residents of the District.

The 2008 Heller decision struck down DC’s handgun ban as unconstitutional, affirmed that the Second Amendment is an individual right; and that it applies to the residents living in our capital city. It also neutralized the anti-gun talking point regarding using the “well-regulated militia” to justify gun control policies:

The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.

The 2010 McDonald decision extended parts of Heller to the states, specifically the right to own a gun in the home.

This is a rather huge victory for Second Amendment supporters. Gun owners can essentially carry their firearms in DC, a place where exercising such a right was verboten for decades.

Although, it seems the city’s 10-round magazine restriction is still in effect. Nevertheless, the city is rushing for a stay in the Palmer decision to prevent hordes of gun-toting tourists from shooting up the city. But DC’s police chief, Cathy L. Lanier, instructed her officers to not arrest anyone carrying handguns on the street (via Washington Post):

D.C. police were told Sunday not to arrest people for carrying handguns on the street in the wake of a judge’s ruling that overturned the city’s principal gun-control law.

However, the D.C. attorney general’s office said it would seek a stay of the ruling while the city decides whether to appeal.

In an order approved by Police Chief Cathy L. Lanier, police were told that District residents are permitted to carry pistols if the weapons are registered. Those who had not registered their handguns could be charged on that ground, the instruction said.

…

Meanwhile, Ted Gest, the spokesman for the D.C. attorney general’s office, which defended the handgun ban in court, said it will “be seeking a stay shortly,” so the order by U.S. District Judge Frederick J. Scullin Jr. may not be in effect for long.

“Its time of effectiveness could be very short,” Gest said.

Legal experts have said that in many cases all parties in a lawsuit are given the opportunity to appeal a ruling before it takes effect. However, it was decided at some point Sunday that Scullin’s ruling took immediate effect, and that set off efforts to bring the city into compliance.

Scullin, a senior U.S. District Court judge who normally sits in the Northern District of New York, wrote in his ruling that he was stopping enforcement of the law “unless and until” the city adopted a constitutionally valid licensing mechanism.

So, what about reciprocity of concealed carry permit holders? The ruling was applicable to them. DC’s Fox5 News’ investigative reporter Emily Miller, formerly of the Washington Times, reported yesterday that concealed carry permit holders from other states would be honored in DC.

STUNNING DEVELOPMENT: DC Police Chief Lanier just told force not to arrest a person who can legally carry a gun in DC or any state.

Nevertheless, before law-abiding gun owners enter DC, there are a lot of questions that need answering. What buildings and areas prohibit concealed carry in DC? Is concealed carry permitted in bars if one does not imbibe? Are hollow points legal? If a gust of wind blows a gun owner’s jacket open that reveals a firearm, is that cause for arrest for failing to conceal? It’s just the tip of the iceberg.

Last year, Texas passed SB 299 to address this issue of failure to conceal a firearm for permit holders in the state.

And what about Vermont residents? A sea of anti-gun legislatures surrounds the state, but it has great gun laws, most notably you don’t need a permit to conceal carry.

Luckily, Dave Kopel, a pro-Second Amendment attorney, addressed some of these issues, which included him saying that it probably isn’t wise to open-carry your AR-15 into DC since the ruling only applied to handguns. He also noted that he couldn’t find a copy of Chief Lanier’s notice to DC Police regarding the Palmer decision, which persons carrying in the city should have on them just in case. I’m not a lawyer, but that seems to be just plain common sense until statues become more clearly defined.

UPDATE: Courtesy of Stephen Gutowski of the Capitol City Project, here’s the order Chief Lanier issued to DC Police following the Palmer decision. It addressed questions raised about Vermont gun owners and Virginia residents, where you don’t need a permit to open carry.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Any resident with a registered handgun can now carry, but they will honor out-of-state residents’ laws. Sounds too good to be true, but I guess that means this Virginian can cross the Key Bridge with my concealed gun and CCW permit in pocket or just open carry. WOW!!! :-))))

Poor knock-out thugs. Attacking white people on the streets will be less fun now, but don’t worry, King Hussein and his Minister of Affirmative-Action Entertainment Eric Holder will join in to do what they can to make sure that any whitey who stands up for himself pays for it with ATF SWAT team visits, IRS audits and hate crimes charges.

The contract between the government and the governed is broken, we just don’t have enough frogs who notice that the pot is boiling yet.

Nevertheless, before law-abiding gun owners enter DC, there are a lot of questions that need answering. What buildings and areas prohibit concealed carry in DC?

Let’s not forget that there are something like 23 different police forces in DC, each with different jurisdictions. Does the ruling apply if you wander through the jurisdictions of the Metropolitan Police, the National Park Service, and the Capitol Police? Not to mention those wandering past the White House on Lafayette Square?
Huge win but I wouldn’t recommend testing the rules just yet.

The rub here for me is that the same people that are constanly whining about home rule for DC are the same ones that are now whining that DC is a special area where the ordinary rules (read Constitutional rights) shouldn’t apply. They can’t have it both ways.

Any resident with a registered handgun can now carry, but they will honor out-of-state residents’ laws. Sounds too good to be true, but I guess that means this Virginian can cross the Key Bridge with my concealed gun and CCW permit in pocket or just open carry. WOW!!! :-))))

I dunno… IANAL, but the Second Amendment and the US Code seem rather clear that any able bodied man belongs to the unorganized militia until they’re 45, and that they’re expected to provide their own firearm.

Has anyone read the decision? It sounds like it disregards US Code or calls US Code unconstitutional.

The DC Police Chief’s memo included a few “scenarios” to illustrate to the officers how they should respond to different situations (DC resident vs non-resident with a permit, etc). One of the scenarios dealt with a Vermont resident (as Vermont allows its residents to carry open or concealed without a permit).

I almost, I repeat, ALMOST sympathize with the DC city council. They are totally stuck in a classic catch-22.

Either pass laws that constitutionally allow for behavior that makes them loose sleep at night, or even worse, they lose all control over such behavior and go straight to constitutional carry. The default is right now their worst nightmare.

I actually DO feel just a tiny bit bad for secret service types right now. Embrace the suck, fellas. It will make you better at your jobs in the end.

Either pass laws that constitutionally allow for behavior that makes them loose sleep at night, or even worse, they lose all control over such behavior and go straight to constitutional carry. The default is right now their worst nightmare.

These people also lose sleep about our unwillingness to participate in their climate change fairytale.

There is no reason to be even the least bit sympathetic for their willful stupidity. This ruling will make them safer. I feel sorry for all the people who’ve been needlessly shot dead on account of their backwards ideology.

I actually DO feel just a tiny bit bad for secret service types right now. Embrace the suck, fellas. It will make you better at your jobs in the end.

Mord on July 28, 2014 at 1:13 PM

Don’t. Obama goes to gun friendly-states all the time and the secret service sweeps any place before he arrives.

The DC Police Chief’s memo included a few “scenarios” to illustrate to the officers how they should respond to different situations (DC resident vs non-resident with a permit, etc). One of the scenarios dealt with a Vermont resident (as Vermont allows its residents to carry open or concealed without a permit).

ksbsnowowl on July 28, 2014 at 1:13 PM

OK – maybe that’s what Huck was implying.
I was hoping he wasn’t thinking the states that border DC – which, of course, does not include Vermont. Which is why I asked before saying anything.

Jul 28, 2014 at 1:13 pm Mord
I almost, I repeat, ALMOST sympathize with the DC city council. They are totally stuck in a classic catch-22.
Either pass laws that constitutionally allow for behavior that makes them loose sleep at night, or even worse, they lose all control over such behavior and go straight to constitutional carry. The default is right now their worst nightmare.
I actually DO feel just a tiny bit bad for secret service types right now. Embrace the suck, fellas. It will make you better at your jobs in the end.

First of all… What the hell are you even talking about??

Second, why do you feel bad for the secret service types? Do you feel bad because the overflowing, rancid sewer of DC will now have armed citizens who are guaranteed to follow every single rule and reg for everything from concealed carry to parking laws?

Do you feel bad because the secret service will now have their job made far easier due to the influx of concealed permit holders who keep an eye out for criminal activity?

No need to register if the state does not have the power to confiscate. Registration is merely the first step to confiscation – both of which are unconstitutional.

Hucklebuck on July 28, 2014 at 12:57 PM

I agree with you, but please let me play “devil’s advocate” for a second.

What if, instead of registering your actual weapon, you just “register” as a competent weapon owner like a “carry license”? The test would be pretty simple. Heck, it would be easier than a driving exam. There isn’t much to know about a weapon. All you have to know is how to load/clear it and what you can and cannot point it at.

You can prove that you are competent to operate a vehicle safely but you don’t have to own a car. If you are caught doing something stupid in your car, the penalty is way more severe if you don’t have a license to operate in the first place. If I had to compromise on full and free carry for all or what the laws in DC used to be like, I think I could live with that “common sense” restriction on a natural right.

I doubt DC will give up on restricting the 2nd but I also bet that they could be forced to adopt something like that as a compromise. Would you agree?

I live in Ohio and we are allowed to protect our selves. My wife has wanted to go to Washington for a vacation for 15 years and I told her no way, the only ones that have guns there are the cops and the criminals. I cant hire a private cop to be with us 24/7, so I never agreed to go. So now that they have changed the law and I have always wanted to go see the museums and the nations capitol. I just told her to start making arrangements for next year. If they don’t take away my 2nd amendment rights again, I will finally get to see the capitol.

I think you just outed yourself as an anti-freedom anti-gun citizen control type.

dentarthurdent on July 28, 2014 at 1:41 PM

I think you skipped over the “Devil’s Advocate” part of my reply. I don’t believe in gun laws at all. I will not follow any when it actually matters and no sane person would.

I was trying to propose the compromise that the gun-grabbing tyrants always say they seek. I was trying to explain a basically unconstitutional regime that I would be willing to “live under” in order to live in peace and retain basic civil liberties at the same time.

I seem to have failed. Provide a better idea if you will, but don’t insult me because you don’t understand where I am coming from.

I live in Ohio and we are allowed to protect our selves. My wife has wanted to go to Washington for a vacation for 15 years and I told her no way, the only ones that have guns there are the cops and the criminals. I cant hire a private cop to be with us 24/7, so I never agreed to go. So now that they have changed the law and I have always wanted to go see the museums and the nations capitol. I just told her to start making arrangements for next year. If they don’t take away my 2nd amendment rights again, I will finally get to see the capitol.

pwb on July 28, 2014 at 1:49 PM

Unfortunately, even if this ruling stands, there is no way you are going to be able to carry in federal buildings such as the Capitol, or in most of the museums since they have metal detectors and ban weapons.

You asked what we think, or perhaps just what Huck thinks – and I answered with what I think.

IF you’re truly NOT an anti-gun type, then yes, you failed.
I saw the “devil’s advocate” lead-in – but the sum total of your comments so far seems to say otherwise – including your “almost” sympathies for the DC council, police, and SS; and your strawman gun training and competence and car analogy.

The simple and proper answer for DC is to allow for 2nd amendment rights, as most states do, and stop trying to be gun-grabbing citizen control tyrants.

Yeah I can’t imagine why that kind of talk might convince people you’re a menace…

Look, once again, you and your collection of firearm fetish materials are no threat to the government. You’re hardly a speed bump to paramilitary police forces and not even that to actual National Reserve units (much less the “real” military). Your fantasies of violent revolution are just that…fantasies.

I think you just outed yourself as an anti-freedom anti-gun citizen control type.

dentarthurdent on July 28, 2014 at 1:41 PM

No, he didn’t. He just said that if there was going to be a restriction, a common license (like a driver’s license) without connection to any particular weapon or carry method, would be better than anything else.

No, he didn’t. He just said that if there was going to be a restriction, a common license (like a driver’s license) without connection to any particular weapon or carry method, would be better than anything else.

GWB on July 28, 2014 at 2:53 PM

Well, I may be wrong, but I didn’t interpret it that way – due to all the other stuff around it.

The sum total of mord’s comments looked (to me) a bit too much like how the gun-grabbers talk – which is “Hey, I’m a gun owner myself, and I believe in the 2nd amendment, buuut, we have to have some common sense restrictions, cuz well, we have to do something cuz it’s not just muskets any more, which is what the 2nd amendment really applies to, and since bad guys might get guns, it’s for the children, if we can just save ONE life…. blah blah….”

You’re hardly a speed bump to paramilitary police forces and not even that to actual National Reserve units (much less the “real” military). Your fantasies of violent revolution are just that…fantasies.

Tlaloc

That’s why half the state of California lost its mind over one guy with guns not too long ago, and why two guys with pressure cookers had Boston on lock down, lol.

Yeah I can’t imagine why that kind of talk might convince people you’re a menace…

Look, once again, you and your collection of firearm fetish materials are no threat to the government. You’re hardly a speed bump to paramilitary police forces and not even that to actual National Reserve units (much less the “real” military). Your fantasies of violent revolution are just that…fantasies.

I was reading the “almost sympathize” bit as sarcasm. (He basically said that it sucks to be them, since they’re stuck between a “scary” result and being total tyrants – which they would like to think they aren’t.) That might have colored everything after for me.

Yeah I can’t imagine why that kind of talk might convince people you’re a menace…

Look, once again, you and your collection of firearm fetish materials are no threat to the government. You’re hardly a speed bump to paramilitary police forces and not even that to actual National Reserve units (much less the “real” military). Your fantasies of violent revolution are just that…fantasies.

Tlaloc on July 28, 2014 at 2:23 PM

If you would have written….

Answer me this. I understand and respect you love of the constitution and the 2nd amendment and your fear that the Federal government has over stepped its boundaries. How would private citizens, in this day and age, fight back against well trained governmental forces?

Nope, you just had to troll. Thus, you don’t care about opinions, you just need to troll.

Understood. I am on the gun freedom side. Just trying to game out the potential ramifications of absolute carry in our nation’s capitol because that is what is potentially happening. I do not think anything bad will happen because of lawful gun owners.

Telling the SS to “embrace the suck” was supposed to be encouraging.

But that was just my interpretation of mord was heading.

dentarthurdent on July 28, 2014 at 3:03 PM

It was totally intended.

I figured the disclaimer would have been enough, but perhaps I was too persuasive?

A compromise is what will happen right now, because that is all that is politically possible. I bet that the gun-rights side will prevail in making it politically impossible to support anything more stringent than the idea that was proposed.

Something will happen, these people are politicians after all. Imagining what might happen doesn’t make me a traitor to some cause.

Look, once again, you and your collection of firearm fetish materials are no threat to the government. You’re hardly a speed bump to paramilitary police forces and not even that to actual National Reserve units (much less the “real” military).

To remind everyone about the various laws in place at this time. Federal LEOs do not enforce local laws. And as I said yesterday they were probably notified that carry is legal in DC, at least until DC successfully gets a stay, at their shift change. Federal LEOs are generally by the book. Federal law allows the carrying of firearms in a National Park if the surrounding jurisdiction allows it. That means that concealed and open carry are legal on the Mall, Rock Creek Park, Roosevelt Island, the C&O Canal trail and any other outdoor area designated as a National Park area. Since federal law prohibits the carrying firearms in federal buildings and reservations, excluding national parks, it is still illegal to possess a firearm in federal office buildings, facilities and the Smithsonian museums. A grey area is shared commercial space rented by the federal government. Check with the property manager before entering such spaces. The carrying of firearms is legal on the Metro in Virginia but I do not know whether DC has a specific prohibition that is independent on the general ban on carrying outside the home. I believe that you cannot carry on the grounds of the US Capital but you can on streets surrounding the capital even though you may be passing by the Library of Congress and the House and Senate Office buildings. I would check on the definition of Capital Hill for firearms purposes first. You will have to observe other firearms laws. For those who love their double stacked plastic guns don’t come visiting unless you happen to have a 10 round magazine. That part of the law remains in force. In general if you stick to outdoor areas you will be ok. Bars and restaurants should by legal because since there are no carry laws in place there are no prohibitions so if the property owner doesn’t have a problem then you are ok. Concealed carry is don’t ask don’t tell so if you plan on eating at your favorite DC restaurant and carry a firearm just do it. I would image that the local universities have separate prohibitions and you should probably stay out of campus areas. They will charge you with trespassing.

And states that make you ask permission for simple possession are illegal as well.

Registration=Unconstitutional.

TX-96 on July 28, 2014 at 4:39 PM

Ya – no kiddin’.
Look at the current fuss in Taxachusetts – the cops are complaining that a new bill there does not give them the right to arbitrarily deny people a “firearms identification card” – which is required to be able to buy a gun.
Think about that – just boggles my mind….

So does this decision now mean, that states like NY and NJ, can no longer refuse the carry rights of those who are not residents of NY and NJ? New York law has always forbiden even the possession of a handgun by any non resident of that state, or any resident without a pistol permit. And, most permits in NY are issued on the basis of hunting and/or target shooting only, and only to those who have established residency in NY. Full carry, at any time, has been reserved for only the well connected,retired police officers, and in some counties upstate.
It seems to me that this federal court’s decision affects much more than just DC.

So does this decision now mean, that states like NY and NJ, can no longer refuse the carry rights of those who are not residents of NY and NJ?

kjatexas on July 28, 2014 at 4:57 PM

No, it doesn’t. This decision is limited to DC for now. And the lack of existing carry laws are why DC is now open to all comers. If they quickly pass a “no reciprocity” law, then that will shut down. (Yes, it will get another round in court with that, but no guarantees.) If they quickly pass a registration/licensing scheme, then the current conditions will cease, as well. (Same as the reciprocity law – challenges will be swift. But, Heaven help you if you’re in DC and carrying the day they pass that law.)

If this decision gets challenged higher, or someone in the NY district challenges it on the basis of the DC decision, then you might have a chance at killing the NY anti-gun statutes.

Now, I could see a qualification card that might be useful (as long as it didn’t restrict your actual purchase in most cases*). “Ooooh, this guy is qualified out to 1,000 feet with a standard rifle. Break out the Barret and that fancy-ass scope we just got in, and see if he’s interested in buying either of them!”
;)

* Look, if you have corners off your Totin’ Chip in Boy Scouts, I don’t let you use a knife at summer camp. If your qual card has notes on it referring to you 1) shooting other people accidentally at the range, or 2) being a registered Democrat, then I can refuse to sell you anything larger than a BB gun until those restrictions are removed.

Let’s not forget that there are something like 23 different police forces in DC, each with different jurisdictions. Does the ruling apply if you wander through the jurisdictions of the Metropolitan Police, the National Park Service, and the Capitol Police? Not to mention those wandering past the White House on Lafayette Square?
Huge win but I wouldn’t recommend testing the rules just yet.

The rub here for me is that the same people that are constanly whining about home rule for DC are the same ones that are now whining that DC is a special area where the ordinary rules (read Constitutional rights) shouldn’t apply. They can’t have it both ways.

Happy Nomad on July 28, 2014 at 12:29 PM

Excellent points all HN. I won’t even test open carry here in Arlington VA, even though technically it’s legal. They’ll just find some other excuse to arrest you. Basically harass you until you stop open carrying.

I’m thinking the only people that this might help are people who legally carry concealed in VA, but accidentally take a wrong turn and end up in what is technically DC, and have the unfortunate luck of getting pulled over while they’re trying to make a turn-around, and the gun is found. That has happened.

Excellent points all HN. I won’t even test open carry here in Arlington VA, even though technically it’s legal. They’ll just find some other excuse to arrest you. Basically harass you until you stop open carrying.

I’m thinking the only people that this might help are people who legally carry concealed in VA, but accidentally take a wrong turn and end up in what is technically DC, and have the unfortunate luck of getting pulled over while they’re trying to make a turn-around, and the gun is found. That has happened.

WhatSlushfund on July 28, 2014 at 6:17 PM

I have opened carried in Bluemont Park without any problems. The Arlington Police will not harass you beyond giving you a hard time. It was a group of open carriers who got arrested in a Shirlington Restaurant whose case went before the SCOVA that resulted in the ruling that Article I section 13 (the Virginia Second Amendment) guaranteed the right to open carry. Arlington lost money on the deal. Besides Theo Stamos is pro Second Amendment. She isn’t going to risk losing lawsuit by prosecuting you.

Let’s not forget that there are something like 23 different police forces in DC, each with different jurisdictions.

Most of the 23 “jurisdictions are Federal LEOs who do not enforce local laws. The FBI is not going arrest you for open carrying in DC unless you violate a federal no gun zone. The transit cops might bust you because the Metro has it rules but if you are arrested in Virginia when it goes before a Virginia magistrate for arraignment he will toss the case since it isn’t illegal to carry on the Metro in VA. You will make money on the deal. It’s even doubtful whether the Arlington or Fairfax County Sheriff’s Departments will even allow them to book you since it isn’t a crime. The Metro stations don’t even have the non legally binding no gun signs.

Look, once again, you and your collection of firearm fetish materials are no threat to the government. You’re hardly a speed bump to paramilitary police forces and not even that to actual National Reserve units (much less the “real” military).

Look, once again, you and your collection of firearm fetish materials are no threat to the government. You’re hardly a speed bump to paramilitary police forces and not even that to actual National Reserve units (much less the “real” military). Your fantasies of violent revolution are just that…fantasies.

Tlaloc on July 28, 2014 at 2:23 PM

Perhaps you need to look up the terms, “asymmetric warfare” and “war of attrition”.